Daughters for Sale

I just finished watching Daughters for Sale, a segment on the PBS show NOW. The program chronicles the practice of child slavery in Nepal:

This week NOW travels to Nepal during the Maghe Sankranti holiday, when labor contractors come to the villages of the area to "buy" the children. There, we meet the Nepalese Youth Opportunity Foundation, which is trying to break the cycle of poverty and pain with an Enterprising Idea. They're providing desperate families with an incentive to keep their daughters: a piglet or a goat that can ultimately be sold for a sum equivalent to that of their child's labor.

It's a heartening story. Three cheers for Olga Murray, who started the work in Nepal that has led to thousands of girls being able to stay at home with their families. And cheers to all the people working for the Nepalese Youth Opportunity Foundation.

Looking at more charities

I get lots of solicitations in the mail from charitable organizations. Usually I toss them, but recently I got something from FINCA, a micro-lending non-profit, that caught my eye. After reading their material, I put them on my list for further investigation for my end-of-the-year giving. I'm also thinking about National Resources Defense Council. Both get a reasonable score from Charity Navigator.

I finally signed up with Charity Navigator, because you can maintain your personalized list of charities there. It does concern me that Charity Navigator does not evaluate itself, but they give a plausible reason for not doing so. I am curious about how much the president, Trent Stamp, pays himself. When I review a charity my eye automatically goes to the director's compensation. I get irked when I see a non-profit director being paid more than me. I then have to weigh my level of irked-ness with my fondness for the charity.

I do read Trent Stamp's blog on occasion. His rants can be quite amusing! Hard not to like and trust the guy.

Thinking about my charitable giving

Here I go ... again!

Last year, I decided to do a little checking up on the charities to which I give. Just to be sure they aren't taking my money on a vacation to Aruba, or something. Invariably the CEO salaries are sky-high. I guess I have to put up with CEOs taking my money to Aruba, even at non-profits. Actually there's one exception: the CEO of Doctors Without Borders only rakes in $100,479. Now that, I can live with.

But it's not so easy to tell what's up. I found two charity ratings organizations and compared. One is Charity Navigator which has a number and star rating (4 stars is tops) and the other is American Institute of Philanthropy, which gives A thru F. AIP gives you a list of top-rated charities, but if you want to get the poop on anything other than these, you have to cough up some cash for their ratings book, which I'm just not going to do.

Here's my list of charities, followed by their ratings:
Charity : AIP rating : CharityNavigator rating

1. Oxfam : B+ : 52 (3 stars)
   
2. Doctors without Borders : A : 61 (4 stars)
   
3. Amnesty International : "not top rated" : 35 (1 star)
   
4. Disabled American Veterans : not rated (info not provided to AIP) : 69 (4 stars)
   
5. World Wildlife Fund : not top rated : 48 (2 stars)
   
6. NARAL : not rated (info not provided to AIP) : 40 (2 stars)
   
7. Planned Parenthood : A : 68 (4 stars)
   
8. UNCF : A : 55 (3 stars)
   
9. NPR/CPTV (public radio/tv) : not listed : 60 (3 stars)
   
10. Tibet House : not listed : not listed
    
11. NY Times Neediest Cases Fund : not listed : not listed
    
12. Kids with Cameras : not listed : not listed
    
13. CFPA (Connecticut Forest and Park Association ) : not listed : not listed
    

The one thing that kind of shocked me, and made me reconsider, is Amnesty's poor rating. I'm still giving to them, but I may switch over to Human Rights Watch, which gets a much better rating. I've been a long-time supporter of Amnesty. It is an "inherited" charity; my mother gave to them, and participated in their letter-writing campaigns... plus they won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1977 ... so they must be good! Right??

So one of my problems in all this is - who is watching the watchers? How do I know that AIP and CharityNavigator are doing a good job? Can I really rely on their ratings? Sure I can read all the info about what they say they do... just like I can read all the info about what these charities say they do. Hmm.